tag:theconversation.com,2011:/global/topics/britain-first-42277/articlesBritain First – The Conversation2018-09-27T12:13:39Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1019192018-09-27T12:13:39Z2018-09-27T12:13:39Z‘Far right’ groups may be diverse – but here’s what they all have in common<p>Far right parties and groups have been enjoying increasing support across Europe. Such parties have <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jcms.12769">performed well</a> in recent domestic elections, often occupying second or third place – and in some cases joining governing coalitions. Examples include the French Front National (FN, now Rassemblement National), the Dutch Freedom Party (PVV), the Austrian Party for Freedom (FPÖ), the Norwegian Progress Party (FrP), the Italian Lega Nord (LN), the Sweden Democrats (SD) and Alternative for Germany (AfD). </p>
<p>Their shared focus on sovereignty, their scepticism of the EU, their emphasis on strict immigration policies and the placing of “native” inhabitants first in areas such as welfare and social services – policies that promote a “<a href="https://www.economist.com/leaders/2016/11/19/the-new-nationalism">new nationalism</a>” – have allowed researchers to compare these parties, often under the umbrella of the “far right”. </p>
<p>However, the term “far right” tends to subsume a broad range of parties and groups that differ significantly in agenda and policy – especially economic and welfare policies – as well as the extent to which they support and employ violence. This category includes both parties that have moderated their agendas, distancing themselves from fascism in order to appeal to broader electorates; and vigilante street groups and extreme parties which employ violence, such as the Greek Golden Dawn (GD), the English Defence League (EDL), Britain First and the Italian Casa Pound. </p>
<p>For this reason, the use of the term “far right” is often contested. So is it appropriate to group such different organisations under the same label?</p>
<h2>Terminology</h2>
<p>The short answer is “yes”. Given the significant variations that exist between these parties and groups, any term that groups them together and compares them will have limitations. But the term “far right” is the least problematic precisely because it can be used, on the one hand, to identify the overarching similarities that make them comparable, and on the other to distinguish between different variants, allowing researchers to take into account the idiosyncrasies of specific cases. </p>
<p>The “far right” umbrella includes parties and groups that share an important commonality: they all justify a broad range of policy positions on socioeconomic issues on the basis of nationalism. The point here is not simply that they are all, to a degree, nationalist; but rather, that they use nationalism to justify their positions on <em>all</em> socioeconomic issues. </p>
<p>The term “right-wing populism”, however, is less appropriate. Populism is an even broader umbrella that often includes disparate parties and groups. To narrow down this category, we often tend <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/07/cambridge-dictionary-nativism-populism-word-year">to conflate populism and nationalism</a>, identifying a party as populist, not on the basis of its populist attributes – what party doesn’t claim to speak on behalf of the people in a democracy? – but on the basis of its nationalist attributes. But despite the similarities between “populism” and “nationalism” – both emphasise conflict lines, focus on the collective, and put forward a vision of an ideal society – the two are conceptually different. While the former pits the people against the elites, the latter pits the in-group against the out-group. </p>
<p>And so herein lies the problem. If nationalism is always a feature of the far right, as most researchers agree, what is the added value of the term “populism”? To put it another way, what is the difference between a radical right-wing party and a populist radical right-wing party? While populism may or may not be an attribute of some far right parties, it is not their defining feature. Rather, nationalism is. </p>
<h2>Extreme vs radical</h2>
<p>Under the “far right” umbrella, we might distinguish between two sub-categories: extreme and radical right. </p>
<p>The extreme right includes both vigilante groups and political parties that are often openly racist, have clear ties to fascism and also employ violence and aggressive tactics. These groups may operate either outside or within the realm of electoral politics, or both. They tend to oppose procedural democracy. </p>
<p>The Greek Golden Dawn, for example, was formed as a violent grassroots movement by far right activists. Prior to its election to the Greek parliament in 2012, the party’s main activities were confined to the streets. Researchers often label this party as fascist or <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/daphne-halikiopoulou/golden-dawn_b_7643868.html">neo-Nazi</a>. Other examples include UK-based street movement <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-britain-first-the-far-right-group-retweeted-by-donald-trump-88407">Britain First</a>, the English Defence League and its former leader <a href="https://theconversation.com/tommy-robinson-the-martyr-how-the-far-right-builds-its-victim-narrative-98261">Tommy Robinson</a>. We might add various white supremacist organisations to this category, such as Stormfront in the US. It is notable that these groups often have ties between them – Stormfront, for example, often promotes Golden Dawn activities in its online materials.</p>
<p>The radical right tends to be the most widespread and electorally successful in Europe. These parties, which include the French FN (now Rassemblement National), Dutch PVV, Sweden Democrats, and the AfD, accept procedural democracy and have distanced themselves from fascism. They oppose the far right label. </p>
<p>These parties also use nationalism to justify all their policy positions. But instead of the ethnic nationalist narrative adopted by extreme right parties – which focuses on blood, creed and common descent – radical right parties utilise a <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1469-8129.2012.00550.x">civic nationalist narrative</a> to promote anti-immigrant agendas, which allows them to appear <a href="https://networks.h-net.org/node/3911/discussions/1971598/brexit-and-rise-right-wing-populism-europe-why-and-how">legitimate</a> to a broad section of the population. </p>
<p>This civic nationalist rhetoric presents culture as a value issue, justifying exclusion on purported threats posed by those who do not share “our” liberal democratic values. This strengthens the ability of these parties to mobilise on issues such as terrorism by linking anti-Muslim narratives to immigration and security. The justification is that certain cultures and religions are intolerant and inherently antithetical to democracy. </p>
<p>It also focuses on social welfare as an important aspect of the <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/government-and-opposition/article/breaching-the-social-contract-crises-of-democratic-representation-and-patterns-of-extreme-right-party-support/C8ECDE8C75B2CD406FE49B107E8B2307">social contract</a> between state and citizens. The positions of these parties are increasingly protectionist and welfare chauvinist, allowing them to mobilise the economically insecure by linking immigration, unemployment and (a purported) welfare scarcity. </p>
<p>This position is not incompatible with “far right” terminology. Extreme right variants have often been statist in their economic orientations – the classic example being fascism. Radical right variants, too, are increasingly departing from <a href="https://www.press.umich.edu/14497/radical_right_in_western_europe">the neo-liberal economic formula</a> of past years to adopt a more <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1354068807075943">economically centrist</a> position.</p>
<p>So, comparable does not mean identical. The BNP is not the same as UKIP. Similarly, Golden Dawn is not the same as the FN or the PVV or the AfD. But these groups are comparable; they all justify their policies on some form of exclusion of an out-group. Comparing them allows us not only to understand their different levels of success across Europe, but also the different forms they take depending on context and circumstance. </p>
<p>In northwest Europe, for example, the most successful far right parties are radical right variants that emphasise immigration and a cultural backlash, such as the PVV, the FN and the SVP; while in crisis-ridden southern Europe, successful far right parties, such as Golden Dawn, tend to be extreme variants which propose statist economic agendas. </p>
<p>But while these parties differ in many ways, their progressive entrenchment in their national political systems raises similar questions about out-group exclusion, anti-immigration narratives and mainstream responses. And this progressive entrenchment has comparable – and significant – implications for the nature of democracy and policymaking in Europe.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101919/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daphne Halikiopoulou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>From welfare chauvinism to value-based nationalism – a breakdown of what constitutes a ‘far right’ group.Daphne Halikiopoulou, Associate Professor in Comparative Politics, University of ReadingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/999622018-07-13T13:55:59Z2018-07-13T13:55:59ZTrump’s claim that Europe is ‘losing its culture’ is racism – and it must be challenged<p>According to Donald Trump, Britain and Europe is “<a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6766947/donald-trump-britain-losing-culture-immigration/">losing its culture</a>” as a result of immigration. In an interview with The Sun newspaper, given in Brussels shortly before travelling to London, Trump explained how migrants from the Middle East and Africa are permanently changing Europe for the worse. </p>
<p>Speaking about the pain it causes him, given that both his mother and father were European, he added:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I think what has happened to Europe is a shame. Allowing the immigration to take place in Europe is a shame. I think it changed the fabric of Europe and, unless you act very quickly, it’s never going to be what it was and I don’t mean that in a positive way … I think you are losing your culture. Look around.“</p>
</blockquote>
<p>On one level, it may not be that surprising that someone who has made immigration a cornerstone of their <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/27/muslim-ban-ruling-trumps-bigotry">political rhetoric and campaigning</a> in the US, has made such comments. But it must be challenged nonetheless. When world leaders adopt cultural racism in this way, they legitimise right-wing extremism. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Podi54MYiow?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Trump on European culture.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Trump’s comments chime with the discourse of the far right in Europe over the past few decades. Key to this is the notion that the West is being ”<a href="http://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australian_outlook/the-rise-of-europes-far-right-and-the-anti-islam-tide/">invaded</a>“. Starting with mass migration following World War II, champions of this rhetoric suggest that immigration to Europe has been far more insidious than humanitarian.</p>
<p>And when it comes to the recent influx of migrants fleeing civil war in Syria, the argument goes further. Now these arrivals seek to "take over” the nation states that are seen to have generously afforded them shelter. Focusing on the fact that recent migrants have been Muslim, far-right rhetoric goes on to suggest that takeover is equivalent to Islamification. It destroys “our” culture, values and way of life and therefore, all that “we” hold dear. Resisting immigration, therefore, is held up as the only way to protect Europe.</p>
<p>Far-right group Britain First, for instance, has routinely cited the perceived need to defend Britain from Muslims and Islam. It even refers to itself as “the frontline resistance” to the Islamification of Britain. This is the same group that enjoyed a major moment in the spotlight when Trump <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-britain-first-the-far-right-group-retweeted-by-donald-trump-88407">retweeted</a> some of its videos late last year.</p>
<p>Potentially conferring credibility on the movement and its abhorrent Islamophobic ideology, it’s likely that Britain First and its supporters will seek to capitalise on Trump’s most recent comments. His views are also likely to bolster those from within the British far-right who have recently used socially acceptable issues – such as the debate over free speech – as a means by which to promote their more divisive ideologies.</p>
<p>Following Twitter’s decision to permanently ban <a href="https://theconversation.com/tommy-robinson-the-martyr-how-the-far-right-builds-its-victim-narrative-98261">Tommy Robinson</a>, the former leader of the English Defence League, as well as two of Britain First’s leaders, Jayda Fransen and Paul Goulding, supporters have come together to protect and defend free speech, presenting it as an a <a href="https://www.radicalrightanalysis.com/2018/05/16/defending-free-speech-a-new-front-for-resisting-islamification/">central element</a> of “our” way of life. They see free speech as a loophole exploited with impunity, especially by Muslims, and argue that “no platforming” people who seek to spread their ideology is a form of censorship. That doesn’t extend to protecting freedom of speech for radical Muslim clerics, of course. </p>
<h2>Cultural racism</h2>
<p>Like the far right, Trump’s comments are a form of what might be best referred to as <a href="https://www.politicsandreligionjournal.com/index.php/prj/article/view/130">“new” or “cultural” racism</a>, a notion that first emerged in the early 1980s. At the time, early race relations legislation in the UK had begun to criminalise and curtail more overt expressions of racism. As a result, there was a marked shift in how many begun to refer to and subsequently employ discourses about minority groups. </p>
<p>Instead of using historically established markers based on skin colour, cultural markers of difference were increasingly deployed to demarcate “them” from “us”. A good example of this was when former Conservative MP Norman Tebbit put forward his “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/jan/08/britishidentity.race">cricket test</a>” to identify which migrants could be seen to be loyal to the UK and thereby a part of who “we” are. Likewise the Conservative MP Michael Fallon who suggested British towns and cities were “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/27/swamped-and-riddled-toxic-phrases-wreck-politics-immigration-michael-fallon">under siege</a>” from migrant workers and people “claiming benefits”. Both are clearly premised on the basis that “they” can not only be differentiated from “us”, but that it is easy to do so.</p>
<p>This tactic enables political actors to navigate new landscapes of diversity and legislation, all the while affirming that “they” are indeed different to “us”. Migrants are, as a result, seen as even more threatening. Not only do they look different, they threaten a way of life. When deployed by political actors, the rhetoric of “losing culture” is far more toxic than what came before. It deliberately hides a bigoted and discriminatory message behind a veneer of respectability and seeming common sense.</p>
<p>In the wake of the Brexit referendum, when <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/hate-crimes-eu-referendum-spike-brexit-terror-attacks-police-home-office-europeans-xenophobia-a8004716.html">levels of hate crime have reached new highs</a> in Britain and when the far right feels increasingly emboldened, Trump’s comments –- more importantly the message underlying them -– are extremely problematic. Given that <a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16350446.trump-uk-rally-planned-to-merge-with-free-tommy-robinson-march/">supporters of Robinson</a> and other from the far right are marching in support of Trump’s visit to the UK, further strengthening or conferring credibility onto them is something that has to be challenged. Where that might come from within the British political establishment is currently sadly unclear.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99962/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Allen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Britain is experiencing a moment of great cultural tension. The US president isn’t helping.Chris Allen, Associate Professor in Hate Studies, University of LeicesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/884902017-12-01T16:10:23Z2017-12-01T16:10:23ZTrump’s Britain First retweets challenge us to fight his fake news habit<p>To justify the lofty title of “leader of the free world”, a president of the US should, by all rights, strive to be at the top of the hierarchy of political credibility. But under Donald Trump, that credibility has crashed to a nadir never seen in modern times. And now, just when it seemed he could hardly sink any lower, Trump has <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-britain-first-retweet-muslim-migrants-jayda-fransen-deputy-leader-a8082001.html">retweeted misleading and inaccurate anti-Muslim videos</a> from the far-right fringe group Britain First. </p>
<p>Once again, he has lowered the bar for what can be expected from the White House, vaulting a loathsome hate group into the global debate in the process.</p>
<p>Coming from an enthusiastic proponent of the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/nov/02/fake-news-is-very-real-word-of-the-year-for-2017">now dictionary-defined</a> term “fake news”, Trump’s retweets are mind-bendingly paradoxical. Let’s assume for a moment that he truly believes everything he shares on social media – that he genuinely believes that the Muslim population of the US (and perhaps the world) poses a threat to national security. After all, this should be a safe assumption to make in reference to a person who retweets content from a group such as <a href="https://theconversation.com/who-are-britain-first-the-far-right-group-retweeted-by-donald-trump-88407">Britain First</a>, whose leaders argue that the West is at war with Islam itself.</p>
<p>We must also assume then that Trump is blind to the irony of his retweets. By sharing unchecked content from such a deplorable source, he is playing into the hands of the same Islamist extremists he’s railing against. </p>
<p>Promoting disproportionate and unfounded generalised fear of an entire minority community is just the sort of scapegoating terrorists in general depend on. Their aim is to turn a populace so furiously against a minority group that that same group’s members start to act accordingly. Once this prophecy is fulfilled, it then becomes justification to elect and re-elect people like Trump.</p>
<p>Fortunately, there are things that can be done to break the cycle. And at the top of the list, the sceptical, informed public must reflect on its own role in this panic over terrorism.</p>
<h2>Truth versus lies</h2>
<p>While the media (and many people in high office) can be blamed for rash and often inaccurate reporting and dissemination of information, the public – now armed with an endless choice of information providers – has a much more active role in the generation of moral panics than at any other point in history. </p>
<p>We create our own <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-check-if-youre-in-a-news-echo-chamber-and-what-to-do-about-it-69999">information echo chambers</a> on social media, which has fast become many people’s primary source of news. And to fight back against invidious behaviour like Trump’s, these echo chambers must be dismantled.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"936037588372283392"}"></div></p>
<p>There is no single easy way to do that. Not all echo chambers are the same. Some members of the public cannot tell the difference between legitimate information and fake news, while others simply just don’t care and are happy to see and disseminate anything, however dubious, that validates the views they already hold. </p>
<p>But there are also those who can see the obvious – that Trump doesn’t just use the term fake news, but embodies it; that he apparently cares little about terrorism itself and instead fixates on who is committing it. So what can be done?</p>
<h2>Fighting back</h2>
<p>One suggestion would be to orchestrate a mass unfollowing of Trump’s Twitter profile. That might at least pack some psychological punch; after all, <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-dangerous-to-flatter-trumps-narcissism-with-too-much-attention-71854">narcissists cannot thrive if no-one listens</a>. But even if all those who follow Trump but don’t support him unfollowed him, that would still leave at least a few million true supporters. </p>
<p>The Britain First incident throws up the possibility that the British government will cancel his as-yet-unscheduled state visit. But given that the expected fallout from Brexit compels the Conservative government to strengthen the special relationship, not strain it, that seems unlikely. The <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41888823">imperative to secure a new trade deal</a> as soon as possible may, alas, come first.</p>
<p>Ultimately, those outside the US who are outraged and depressed by Trump’s effect on public discourse have little choice but to grit their teeth and hope the American electorate can right a wrong in the painfully distant 2020 election. Until then, we the people need to not let this kind of behaviour become acceptable or become the norm. The public must demand better than this from their elected leaders – and not succumb to the fear and bigotry that these videos are designed to spread.</p>
<p>And most importantly, we the people need to constantly challenge the fake news distribution from Mr Fake News himself: the president of the United States.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88490/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul TJ French does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The world’s loudest hater of ‘fake news’ is also a brazen peddler of insidious misinformation.Paul TJ French, PhD Candidate in Law, Liverpool John Moores UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/884072017-12-01T14:48:46Z2017-12-01T14:48:46ZWhat is Britain First – the far-right group retweeted by Donald Trump?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197114/original/file-20171130-30919-femgsj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Britain First leader Paul Golding and deputy leader Jayda Fransen.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">PA/Nick Ansell</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Donald Trump’s decision to retweet a number of videos originally posted by Jayda Fransen – the deputy leader of the far-right street movement Britain First – was as unfounded as it was unexpected. Retweeted without additional comment, the three videos purported to show a group of Muslims pushing a boy off a roof, another of a Muslim destroying a statue of the Virgin Mary, and finally, an immigrant Muslim violently beating a Dutch boy on crutches. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"936037588372283392"}"></div></p>
<p>The authenticity of the videos was quickly thrown into question by the <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-britain-first-retweet-muslim-migrants-jayda-fransen-deputy-leader-a8082001.html">Dutch embassy in Washington</a>, which claimed the perpetrator in the final video had been born and raised in the Netherlands.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"935953115249086464"}"></div></p>
<p>Nevertheless, Fransen celebrated having had her tweets shared with Trump’s near 44m followers on Twitter. Having been arrested and charged earlier in the day for using “threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” at a rally in Northern Ireland in August, Fransen tweeted: “God bless you Trump! God bless America!”, before signing off with “OCS” – an abbreviation for Onward Christian Soldiers.</p>
<p>Despite the retweets having been met with near unequivocal condemnation, including an unusually strong statement from prime minister <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/29/trump-account-retweets-anti-muslim-videos-of-british-far-right-leader">Theresa May</a> – for whom it was the first time that she has publicly acknowledged Britain First – what is of most concern is the potential impact Trump’s endorsement will have in conferring credibility on Britain First and its abhorrent Islamophobic ideology. His tweets have the potential to garner greater and more significant support for the group, which would no doubt strengthen its ranks thereby increasing its reach. That much is evident in the fact that since the retweets, Fransen’s personal Twitter account has been bolstered by an additional 22,000 followers.</p>
<h2>Aggressive tactics</h2>
<p>To date, in spite of having <a href="https://www.facebook.com/OfficialBritainFirst/">1.9m followers on Facebook</a> Britain First has struggled to mobilise significant numbers of people “in real life”. At many of its rallies and demonstrations, numbers rarely exceed <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suYfaiG-_lQ">low hundreds at best</a>. From videos on its <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtEsYNHwF37lrd9IH7Tv-uA">YouTube page</a>, on most occasions the group comprises no more than a relatively small number of individuals, Fransen being one. It’s possible that with the exposure afforded by Trump’s retweets, more people will make the transition from clickbait to street activist.</p>
<p>Formed in 2011, the group largely failed to make any inroads in the political mainstream. Fransen received just <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/byelection/11241798/Rochester-and-Strood-by-election-live.html">56 votes</a> when she stood for a parliamentary by-election in 2014.</p>
<p>It has therefore adopted increasingly direct action techniques to make its mark. Britain First has its roots in the far-right British National Party and has benefited from the demise of the English Defence League, another extreme-right street movement.</p>
<p>The murder of British soldier Lee Rigby in 2013 catalysed the group to become increasingly anti-Muslim while engaging in confrontational publicity seeking activities. These have included undertaking <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/639742/Tensions-stoked-Britain-First-Christian-patrol-Muslims-Luton">Christian patrols in armoured vehicles</a> in densely populated Muslim areas of London and walking through similarly populated areas <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/639742/Tensions-stoked-Britain-First-Christian-patrol-Muslims-Luton">carrying large white crosses</a>. The group is most notorious for organising <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-first-battalion-invades-mosque-demanding-removal-of-sexist-entrance-signs-9607978.html">mosque invasions</a>, where they confront imams and worshippers, insisting they accept copies of army-issue bibles.</p>
<p>While its direct actions have drawn headlines, it is online where Britain First is most active and has greatest impact. Maximising the potential of Facebook in particular, the group regularly post memes and images that range from puppies sitting next to the Union flag, to remembering the soldiers who fought to save Britain in the first and second world wars. Few of these images explicitly refer to the group itself, instead asking people to like and share if they are patriotic or proud of “our boys”, for instance. In doing so, many people unwittingly like and share Britain First content without ever knowing what the group stands for. </p>
<p>Defining itself as <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-923X.12118/epdf">a political party and street defence organisation</a>, Britain First’s ideology is one of popular nationalism. Drawing upon notions of white supremacy and an end to immigration, most prominent is its message that it offers the “frontline resistance” to the Islamification of Britain. </p>
<h2>Religious undertones</h2>
<p>Britain First differs from other far-right groups in that as well as routinely deploying Christianity and Christian iconography in quite phoney and patronising ways, its founder – James Dowson – is actually a former evangelical Protestant minister. He not only had close ties to loyalist paramilitaries in Northern Ireland, but also vociferously campaigned against abortion. Because of this, the group believes that Christianity is the bedrock of British society and culture. More worrying though is the hierarchy’s belief that the apocalyptic end game is near and that salvation can only be achieved through <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-923X.12118/epdf">a war between Christianity and Islam</a>.</p>
<p>While such bizarre beliefs may be easily dismissed, retweets from Trump matter. In sharing Britain First’s messages with millions, the president is potentially bestowing permission to hate on those who hold similar views to Fransen and her group. </p>
<p>It’s possible that Trump will not only confer legitimacy and credibility on Fransen’s tweets but will contribute to creating and enabling environment that seeks to afford legitimacy to public expressions and acts of hostility towards Muslims and their communities. </p>
<p>Trump seems to already bestowing that permission in the US with his rhetoric about a Muslim ban. Now he is doing similar in Britain via Britain First.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88407/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Allen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The US president has lent legitimacy to a small group of right-wing extremists by sharing its content.Chris Allen, Lecturer, Department of Social Policy, Sociology & Criminology, University of BirminghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/828422017-08-23T12:26:05Z2017-08-23T12:26:05ZHow the English far right co-opted Christianity – and why its ‘crusade’ shouldn’t be ignored<p>The far-right group <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britain_First">Britain First</a> went on the rampage again recently, <a href="https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/news/3683/one-arrest-britain-first-day-action-wolverhampton">this time in the West Midlands</a> of England. Earlier this month, the group held a <a href="https://www.expressandstar.com/news/local-hubs/wolverhampton/2017/08/12/britain-first-demonstration-man-charged-with-public-order-offence/">demonstration in Wolverhampton city centre</a>, where members carried white crosses through the city. The bearing of white crosses is now a <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-first-stage-hapless-protest-outside-london-mosque-and-only-three-people-turn-up-a6905851.html">trademark</a> of Britain First’s self-styled “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/13/police-far-right-invasions-bradford-glasgow-mosques-britain-first">Christian Crusade</a>”.</p>
<p>The group <a href="https://www.channel4.com/news/britain-first-far-right-anti-muslim-extremists-mosques">regularly co-opts Christian rhetoric and symbolism</a> in its white nationalist <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dog-whistle-politics-can-be-a-deadly-game-bf2jngl68">dog-whistle</a> campaign against the “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/06/britain-first-supporter-calls-for-merkel-to-be-shot-for-refugee-policy">Islamisation</a>” of the UK. It conducts “<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/01/25/britain-first-luton-march-condemned_n_9067474.html">Christian patrols</a>” in multicultural towns and cities – usually piggybacking on recent <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-first-christian-patrols-return-to-east-london-in-wake-of-charlie-hebdo-shootings-9988329.html">terrorist events</a> or <a href="http://www.southyorkshiretimes.co.uk/news/britain-first-march-through-rotherham-1-6877971">abuse scandals</a> – and <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/far-right-activists-hand-out-bibles-outside-mosques-in-bradford-9352271.html">doles out bibles</a> during its <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38326446">mosque “invasions”</a>. </p>
<p>The white crosses brandished by members of Britain First are seemingly chosen more for the sinister white supremacist imagery than they are for being emblems of Christianity – echoing the <a href="http://www.christianpost.com/news/kkk-leader-were-a-christian-organization-claims-the-klan-is-not-a-hate-group-116614/">Ku Klux Klan</a> insignia and <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0022009407071629">that organisation’s use of burning crosses</a> to signify intimidation and the threat of impending violence.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183141/original/file-20170823-20456-105eo2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183141/original/file-20170823-20456-105eo2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183141/original/file-20170823-20456-105eo2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183141/original/file-20170823-20456-105eo2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183141/original/file-20170823-20456-105eo2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183141/original/file-20170823-20456-105eo2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183141/original/file-20170823-20456-105eo2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ku Klux Klan at a cross burning in Tennessee. September 4, 1948.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/ku-klux-klan-cross-burning-tennessee-251929858?src=ae3zjy9NgLbG-dyOQsWqiw-1-1">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Although Britain First adopts clearly confrontational, <a href="http://metro.co.uk/2017/07/11/britain-first-holds-security-training-day-to-teach-how-to-fight-with-knives-6770167/">aggressive</a> and hate-fuelled tactics such as <a href="https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/av4jzg/say-hello-to-britains-new-far-right-street-team">pouring beer outside mosques</a>, threatening to <a href="http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/britain-first-extremists-plot-pig-burial-halt-controversial-dudley-mega-mosque-1474294">leave a dead pig on the site of a new mosque</a> in Dudley and <a href="http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/06/19/britain-first-the-violent-new-face-of-british-fascism">wearing paramilitary-style uniforms</a>, its leader, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-27427023/britain-first-s-leader-paul-golding-on-bnp-breakaway">former British National Party councillor</a> Paul Golding, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/13/police-far-right-invasions-bradford-glasgow-mosques-britain-first">refuses to accept</a> that Britain First’s extremist provocations are intimidating and instead appeals to Christianity as a cover for the group’s white nationalism:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We weren’t aggressive and we didn’t intimidate anyone … to suggest it’s intimidatory to give out bibles in a Christian country is nonsense. We live in a free country where you’re allowed to try to recruit other people to your religion. Muslims do it all the time … We just went into the mosques, gave out a few bibles and leaflets, talked to some elders and left.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Despite his claim to civility, Golding also alludes to the New Testament verse <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+10%3A34&version=NRSV">Matthew 10:34</a> and the belligerence of <a href="https://feminismandreligion.com/2013/12/20/by-kelly-brown-douglas/">Jesus</a> to <a href="http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/rochester-by-election-britain-first-inspired-by-jesus-christ-claims-leader-paul-golding-1475814">justify his group’s terrorist actions</a>. Speaking to <a href="https://www.christiantoday.com/article/how.far.right.party.britain.first.is.gaining.traction.through.christian.ideology/43380.htm">Christian Today</a>, Golding commented:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Jesus Christ did use physical violence according to the Gospels in the temple in Jerusalem, and he met a very violent end. He preached love and forgiveness etc, but he also said he didn’t come to bring peace; he came to bring division and a sword, he came to bring fire upon the world to sort the world out.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Undoubtedly, Britain First is adept at appropriating Christianity, staging publicity stunts and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/britain-first-explainer_uk_5763addee4b01fb658634f42">attracting interest on social media</a>, but the group is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/britain-first-trounced_uk_572cace2e4b0ade291a1c7d7">far less successful</a> in <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/11/21/britain-first-ukip-roches_n_6197160.html">achieving its political ambitions</a>. </p>
<p>It has failed to garner any sway with the electorate having been <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/britain-first-trounced_uk_572cace2e4b0ade291a1c7d7?edition=uk">trounced in the London mayoral elections</a>, its <a href="http://www.independent.ie/world-news/and-finally/people-were-struck-by-the-poor-turnout-at-the-britain-first-and-english-defence-league-march-but-police-were-taking-no-chances-35585162.html">“patrols” are poorly attended</a>, and its attempts to harass Muslim communities are <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-first-high-court-bid-luton-mosque-islamophobia-racism-a7186446.html">hampered</a> by <a href="https://www.indy100.com/article/britain-first-just-admitted-they-are-near-humiliation-and-asked-members-for-20--WyeUBw0kMZb">expensive</a> <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jayda-fransen-guilty-britain-first-deputy-leader-convicted-court-muslim-woman-hijab-a7395711.html">litigation</a>. </p>
<p>In a devastating blow, even Britain First founder, former BNP member Jim Dowson, <a href="http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/britain-first-founder-james-dowson-quits-over-far-right-groups-mosque-invasions-1458614">left the group in 2014</a> <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-first-founder-jim-dowson-quits-over-mosque-invasions-and-racists-and-extremists-9632770.html">condemning them as “unchristian”</a>. Dowson lambasted Britain First and its leader in his public statement following the resignation: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>I think he is fooling himself and lots of people that Britain First is a Christian group. Sadly, it has just become a violent front for people abusing the Bible.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Ignore the racists?</h2>
<p>Dowson isn’t the only one to condemn them. Rather awkwardly for a group marketed as a defender of “<a href="http://www.britainfirst.tv/">British and Christian morality</a>”, Britain First <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/01/29/britain-first-denounced-every-christian-group_n_9111138.html">has been</a> “denounced by every major Christian denomination in the UK”. Most recently, the Bishop of Wolverhampton, the Rt Revd Clive Gregory, criticised the group: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Britain First’s use of the cross and claim to support Christianity is actually a kind of blasphemy … Jesus’ way is always the path of peace and reconciliation, of self-sacrifice and costly love, and in our contemporary multicultural society that means particularly in our relationships with our neighbours of other faiths including Muslims.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Given Britain First’s underwhelming credentials, then, it’s tempting to agree with William Morgan, who <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-went-undercover-at-the-britain-first-conference-and-trust-me-we-have-nothing-to-fear-a7014826.html">went undercover</a> at a Britain First conference last year and dismissed the group as “a small and nasty far-right group, who just so happen to have a strong social media presence including 1.3m Facebook likes … a racist drinking group, too old and overweight to do anything but intimidate members of the public and lose elections”.</p>
<p>Morgan’s final words of advice following his single experience with the group? “As I have learned, the best way to deal with Britain First is to completely ignore it, see it as a group project and an online message board for the angry and bitter, and move on. Trust me: we have very little to worry about.”</p>
<p>Morgan’s words may sound like a sensible approach to a small and seemingly ineffectual group of far-right extremists – until they’re considered in the context of the recent <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/22/charlottesville-confederate-statues-black-heather-heyer">white supremacist rally in Charlottesville</a>, Virginia. <a href="https://www.vox.com/2017/8/12/16138246/charlottesville-nazi-rally-right-uva">Unite the Right</a> demonstrated that white nationalist and supremacist groups are <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40915356">emboldened</a> by the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/13/america-white-supremacy-hooked-drug-charlottesville-virginia">current US political context</a>. President Donald Trump’s <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-charlottesville-condemn-white-supremacist-groups-white-house-not-dignify-them-neo-nazi-a7891941.html">refusal to condemn white supremacist groups</a> and his <a href="https://www.vox.com/2017/8/15/16154028/trump-press-conference-transcript-charlottesville">insistence</a> that they shared a “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/17/trump-neo-nazis-antifa-moral-equivalence-tweets-charlottesville">moral equivalency</a>” with anti-fascist protestors has only <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/trump-charlottesville-nazis-confederate-monument/537195/">helped to reinvigorate white supremacist politics</a>.</p>
<p>In other words, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/28/brexit-europe-far-right-rightwing-extremists-politics-terrorism">ignoring small far-right groups doesn’t work</a> and, in fact, could well <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/06/who-will-take-responsibility-rise-far-right-terrorism">help them to thrive</a>. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iVvpXZxXWZU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The response to Tina Fey’s <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/08/let-us-eat-cake/537294/">recent Saturday Night Live skit</a> on Charlottesville exposed the danger of <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/8/18/16166836/tina-fey-snl-charlottesville-weekend-update">imperatives from well-meaning white people to “ignore the racists”</a>. Only those not touched by the realities of racial violence have the freedom to be able to ignore it.</p>
<p>As a society we must not become complicit in white supremacism because of white privilege. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"898574755158085632"}"></div></p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"898613453501476864"}"></div></p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"896400052868050945"}"></div></p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"896233228935221248"}"></div></p>
<p>As Musa Okwonga <a href="https://twitter.com/Okwonga/status/897565895358160896">wrote on Twitter</a>: “White supremacy isn’t just white men with burning torches. It’s white people brushing off warnings from non-white people till it’s too late.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/82842/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Katie Edwards does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There’s talk of a new ‘Christian crusade’ – and it’s highly dangerous.Katie Edwards, Director SIIBS, University of SheffieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.